Certainly the speed of the dispatch of Hunt – who won the 2001 Nobel prize in physiology for his work on cell division – from his various academic posts is startling. In many cases this was done without him even being asked for his version of events, he says. The story shows, if nothing else, that the world of science can be every bit as brutal as that of politics.

There is no difference now between academic science & politics. I'm sorry that Hunt, a brilliant man, has to discover this the hard way so late in his career.

No one who has studied the history of the Left from the French revolution on & the regimes it created can find this outcome surprising. The use of the ever changing "party line" to trip up "counter-revolutionaries" goes back to the French Revolution, and has never disappeared from the armamentum of the Left since. These are not nice people, and if they can, they will hurt you.

I apologize for what is effectively a "double comment," but here is an edited update of something I wrote yesterday at the end of another comment thread:

[It] is a little curious that his views are only now an issue. Twenty-five years ago, when I was in grad school, Hunt already had an international reputation in the academic/scientific communities for outspoken sexism. It was widely written off as a bizarre eccentricity of a brilliant man from another generation. I knew women who wanted to work in his lab, and they all had to make a hard decision about whether it was worth it or not. Certainly, the administration of every university which has employed him would have been aware of his very vocal views, and I have zero doubt that they set aside political correctness in favor of prestige and finances. (For what it's worth, his work truly was foundational to our understanding of cell division at a molecular level, though it is interesting to note the vital role of women in the fundamental discovery. Indeed, there are some who argue that the women should have been among the laureates, and their argument is not without merit. Hunt, himself, lauded these women in his Nobel lecture.)

That said, given the number of pathological personalities in academic science, I'm not sure that Hunt's sexism necessarily has a different impact on the daily lives of students and staff than any number of toxic behaviors demonstrated by professors and lab heads, both male and female. As a male, I also had to make tough decisions about whether or not to work for professors of either gender who had reputations for bad behavior of one sort or another. The power differential between a famous professor and her students and staff is enormous, and abuses of all kinds are tolerated, especially if the professor brings a lot of well-funded grants to the university. I have seen individuals psychologically destroyed by faculty behaviors that would not long be tolerated outside academic fiefdoms.

“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry,”

Ok, it's a little gauche. A little sexist. He says he was nervous, trying to tell a joke. One could see female scientists, particularly those in his lab, taking offense.

When that happens, a modest apology should solve the problem.

Is it really that big of a deal, though? I understand that we have a self-appointed, permanent, Professional grievance committee at large, waiting in the shadows, waiting to be offended. But who gave them any authority? Who gave them a platform? They are mostly humorless pedants, and have become worse than than the imaginary demons they seek to slay.

Not the first brilliant scientist to lack some subset of social skills.

Being the smartest guy in the room sometimes causes one to say things that don't sit well with the dimmer bulbs...

Is his science wrong? If not, like Linus Pauling (one of only 2 people to win as a solo the Nobel Prize twice, Madame Curie being the other) I can forgive some sins...

An old friend of Pauling's said of him, "When he was right, which was more often than not, he was very, very right. But when he was wrong, which he also was from time to time, there was no way to get him to see it.

He comes off as a sympathetic figure in the Guardian article. The outrage is wildly disprortionate to the offense. If he had used his stature and position to leverage blowjobs from research assistants, then this would be an appropriate response.......One also notes how Boston University adjudged the malicious remarks made by their African American prof to be regrettable but ultimately a matter of free speech.......What is the feminist position on Joyce Michelll, the prison worker who helped those two convicts escape?

Henry Ford was an anti-Semite, and Shockley was a racist. That said, they profoundly changed life for the better in this country and the world. Why are unpopular opinions only tolerated when they're to the left of the politically correct view. If Hunt had something sexist about how more research grants should go to women because male scientists only want to design exploding rockets, then he would be celebrated for his outspokenness.

Any reference to human nature and observable reality is forbidden. This was somewhat true when I was in grade school in the fifties, but the punishment was to be considered odd. These days the punishment is loss of position, grant money, and reputation. The consequences of living in an enforced fantasy world invented by troubled persons cannot be good.

"A stupid thing to say" has a dual meaning: (1) Something in whose truth no intelligent person could believe, or (2) Something no intelligent person with an eye for the main chance would let himself be heard saying, be it true or no.

“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry”

Another thing that can happen is that a girl provides you the data you need to develop your theory and then dies of cancer and so isn't eligible for the Nobel prize you win. But that is Watson & Crick's story, not Hunt's.

That said...

What he said was wrong, he acknowledges, but the price he and his wife have had to pay for his mistakes has been extreme and unfair.

I do agree with this:

His treatment also demonstrates the innate cruelty of social media, and in particular the savage power of Twitter, which first revealed the scientist’s transgression. The tale also demonstrates how PR departments, in trying to protect the reputation of institutions, often do so at the expense of the individuals who work for or make up those bodies.

Twitter can't die fast enough, as far as I'm concerned. If Facebook follows, I will miss the old friends who post family photos and the artists who link to art and the tiny number of people who link to thought-provoking articles. I sure won't miss the idiot agit-prop.

This is why people hate feminissts and gay rights agendaists and liberals. They have no sense of humor. Even if he did say something bad, so fricking what? Maybe he has a point. I would add the reaction to his statements as reasons why women aren't good in science. They are soulless automatons with no sense of humor and no idea that alternative ideas to their orthodoxy are allowed to be expressed.

And then feminists will do things like try to ban the word "bossy" because they think its calling girls bossy when they act so, turns women off to corporate jobs or dreams of being entrepeunurS. When what they are really are saying is you can't use words to describe women that actually correlate to their behavior because that would be insulting. EVEN THOUGH TRUE.

This response is not bossy, but CUNTY. They are acting like CUNTS. If they don't like that characterization, maybe don't act like CUNTS.

I worked with lots of STEM folks over the years, most of them in Information Technology. Many of the best and brightest immersed themselves in their technical work and didn't give a rat's kiester about political correctness. They dealt in verifiable facts and were often relegated to basement offices (near the data centers) where they were less likely to interact with the general work population. They would probably be diagnosed as being mildly autistic if they were in public schools today. Their greatest strengths were their intense focus and their ability to see technical issues others totally missed. One of them told me he liked to work "close to the metal" and that he disliked programming in high level languages.

Going forward he should tell women "DOn't speak. I will give you a direction and you will nod yes or no. If I ask for your input you will provide it in distinct sentences that relate only to what I asked you. If you deviate from this I will fire you. Do not smile, do not say "How was your day?". Even when saying good night do not do so. We have no relationship outside of our interactions based solely on science". If you are a minute late I will dock you. If you vary from my rules in any way, I will dock you. We will not be friends, just colleagues and no warmth will pass between us. And if you are wrong with your calculations I will rip your ass a new one, so you better be 100% right all the time. Do you still want to work for me?"

Who cares? This kind of PC fascism has been going on forever. As long as people cower in the corners trying to ward off the fascists with their cries of "I'm not a sexist/racist/homophobe! No one's more in favor of Comrade Stalin than I am" then they'll continue to smashed for thought crimes.

I have no doubt that before he committed heresy, this guy was in favor of "Right-wingers" being punished for "hate speech".

Did you know that in England, the police actually patrol the internet looking for "racism" and "xenophobia" and if they find it, they track people down, knock on their doors and take them in for "questioning"?

However, Bahar Mustafa, a student “diversity officer” at London’s Goldsmiths University will not be removed from her position after making a series of anti-White comments and rants on Twitter. She banned white people from attending an “anti-racist” rally at Goldsmiths University. She also used the twitter hashtag “#killallwhitemen”, and called people “white trash.”

". . . reaction to his remarks about the alleged lachrymose tendencies of female researchers has virtually finished off the 72-year-old Nobel laureate’s career as a senior scientific adviser."

Not sure whether "lachrymose" here means "tearful" or "mournful" or both - but at 72, Tim needs to retire if his life is so oriented to group gropes instead individual assessments. Above all else, 72 year-old people should have lost the egotistical tendencies of youth, but here Tim and wife are telling their tearful and mournful tale to the Guardian of all places.

The problem is not Tim Hunt. It is the pansies who are the employers who are intimidated by these twit storms from twits. I am getting very tired of attempts todestroy someone's livelihood because you don't agree with them. A lot of these twits from twitters would result in their unemployment if it were followed up. This started with Brendan Eich and has only accelerated. The glee the left shows when they get someone fired is a combination of evil and masochism. It has to stop.

I thought the twitter-sphere response that Ann posted yesterday was generally graceful and goodhumored. It's a given that the social justice crusaders are vicious and relentless, but I figure that anyone who couldn't foresee the outcome of his dopey remarks probably deserved what he got.

Plus, there is a hope that the universe tends to right itself somehow, and if so, his just deserts were delivered for a lifetime of earlier unrelated sins. Following that same hope, his most toxic critics will also get cancer and die painfully.

For myself, I happen to like lady marine scientists since they go crazy when you get them wet.

Indeed, the Treasury Department’s published list states explicitly this is just those about whom the Secretary of the Treasury has data. It means these numbers are under-stated, some say considerably. The presence or absence of tax motivation used to impact how one would be taxed on departing the U.S. Today, it is no longer relevant why someone expatriates.

The law was changed in 2004, so tax consequences do not hinge on why one leaves. But that could change. After Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin departed permanently for Singapore with his IPO riches, there was an angry backlash. Mr. Saverin’s fly-away prompted such outrage that Senators Chuck Schumer and Bob Casey introduced a bill to double the exit tax to 30% for anyone leaving the U.S. for tax reasons.

I am a very conservative attorney who does Title VII defense work and I'm married to a (hot) woman who is a PhD microbiologist in the private sector. My wife and I read this story and have been talking about it quite a bit, and my (our) take on it is quite different that most here.

I understand the natural desire to tag this as another baseless / irrational twitter lynching / SJW scalping, but I think that the reason this got such a big reaction from the female scientist crowd is because the comment hit a variety of points that infuriate young, women scientists on a regular basis.

Nearly every woman scientist I know - and I know many - have experienced the creepy male shtick. I'll spare you my wife's personal experiences, but as a Title VII attorney, I wince / get outraged / lecture her on the law, and she tells me to shut the fuck up, that she can't do anything about it if she wants her career to continue. Both the behavior and the reaction of my wife is common across the board. This is for several reason: social retard behavior seen in many STEM folks (sorry, it's true), relatively few women in many of the fields, and huge power imbalances.

The biggest factor early on is the power imbalances. Older scientists just own the careers of their subordinates, in a way that you don't see in most highly educated professional fields. This is particularly brutal in the beginning of your (PhD) career, where your PI just owns your existence. Further, older, established scientists get funding in a very seniority-based / old boys club fashion, so they are overly insulated from institutional crack-downs. Lastly, due to women generally being interested in hours / life balance / family, they are naturally dragged lower in many institutions (for all the usual reasons, right or wrong).

So the typical woman scientist has generally been at the mercy of a socially retarded older male who has few, if any, checks on his behavior. If the woman speaks up, her career is exceptionally vulnerable to destruction, whether that be to withholding funding, recommendations, or assignment of good paper-making projects. Further, this woman scientist has generally spent her career doing the baseline lab work that supported the projects and that said older male gets credit for (through additional funding and publications).

Enter Tim Hunt. At a major conference he has the temerity to make that ludicrous, sexist joke, where he says that only three things happen with women in the lab. First, is that you (referring to men) fall in love with them. This is the creepy-shit that drives women scientists crazy. They don't want you hitting on them, thanks. Two, they fall in love with you. No, more often than not Mr. I'm In Charge And I Can't Keep All Deez Bitches Off of Me, women are just humoring you / don't want to piss you off, and just want to do their jobs and go home. Three, they cry when you criticize them. To which most professional, hard working women would say... fuck you. Oh, and most women work in the labs, so maybe four things happen?

Then, when he gets the push back his stupid comment deserves, instead of fighting what he believes to be the unfairness of it all, he takes the cowardly way out and resigns. Then goes to the newspaper and complains about social media and gets his wife to defend him. Wa. Wa. Wa.

There are consequences to being a major figure for a university who gets to trot the globe on someone else's dime. One of those is not perpetuating inane sexism at major conferences.

The problem is that Hunt's punishment doesn't fit his "crime". He didnt sexually harass anyone in his lab. And, he's not responsible for any generalized "sins" against female scientists. He made a bad comment. He was called out for it. Perhaps, some of his staff members will quit. He should apologize.

But the permanent, standing, feminist, grievance committee should also stand down and, frankly, pipe down. We're tired of them as well.

Yes, fine, social-retard is unfair. I hang out with them all the time so perhaps that was the glibness of familiarity showing through. What I meant by it was that often these comments / sexist nastiness don't have conscious intent behind it. Hence the "I was just joking" defense which many people just think, "What BS." I think he probably meant it as a joke, but he didn't mean it as one that highlights many of the things that piss off women in the field.

Some stereotypes exist for a reason. I'm a lawyer, and most lawyers are argumentative assholes. And many STEM folks fit the scientist stereotype. Sorry?

The realization is creeping in, isn't it? You make a joke about something with which you are"familiar" and someone else outside doesn't see it that way. It spirals out of control and you're fired. That's an eye-opener isn't it? Do we really want that to be SOP, even if you are in the wrong? Someone could take your comment here, publish it in just the right place, and your life turns to shit. I'd start holding your breath if I were you.

Having said that, I liked the tweet from (the parody account) Godfrey Elfwick (sp?). Paraphrasing, "We like to think of ourselves as differently tarded."

STEM guys in any field tend to fit the scientist stereotype. I'm an engineer and worked with every sort of technician and engineer, including plenty of computer/IT types. They are all very similar, especially the true gurus.Do not ask for delicate social sensibilities. It's not in their nature. It's like berating a horse for being incontinent, its pointless. Just be glad they pull your cart. This is a case where people are beating a horse for following his nature. It's stupid and cruel.

Eh? That's a hell of a way to go through one's life. And I think the risk is severely overblown by many. This guy made this offensive joke, in prepared remarks, in an official capacity, in front of hundreds of people - to the EXACT people the joke was about. One could predict the results. Anyway, I do Title VII defense work. People already think I'm a bigot for defending the man.

@ buwaya puti

If it is in your nature to say stupid things like that, then you should avoid public speaking. He seems to be benefiting a great deal from the positives from such work, there be negatives too...

He is 72. Until recently he would have died, become infirm or been forced into mandatory retirement anyway some years ago. But thanks to scientific/public health advances and progressive legislation he got to stay on until his insufferable sexism finally go the better of him in the wrong professional setting and his peers let him know he wasn't welcome around anymore. Boo hoo.

He erred in that he thought he was making a joke, when in fact he was speaking the truth. He would have been forgiven far worse if it had in fact been an absurd statement with no basis in fact. It's perfectly fine to ask forgiveness of an obviously malicious lie. But how do you say "I'm sorry" when you've told the truth?

I got the feeling that this was the straw that broke the camel's back. This guy's modus operandi included such notions expressed in a variety of ways with little regard for how they might be received by his hearers. Spoken as a joke, they reflected pretty much how he felt and acted.

progressive legislation he got to stay on until his insufferable sexism finally go the better of him in the wrong professional setting and his peers let him know he wasn't welcome around anymore. Boo hoo.

Please regale us with your scientific accomplishments; besides of course figuring out how to breathe,

Since Feminists are pro-choice or unprincipled, the violation he committed is not self-evident as a matter of course. Was his crime defined by an orientation, speech, observation, or merely lacking sufficient leverage a la Clinton, Obama, etc.? The social complex (e.g. civil rights) lost all credibility when they adopted pro-choice doctrine to regulate their behavior.

Drago is a typical liberal - sits back and does absolutely nothing while demanding everyone else spoon feds him everything he wants. And he can't even ask politely and properly (what part do you need a link for: That there was a recall election against Walker? That someone was fired for signing it? That Fen commented on those actions? All of that? Or is it something entirely different that you're totally clueless about?) and instead just grunts out a one-word demand. And just watch how big his meltdown is when he doesn't get bottle-fed the way he wants.

Learn to google and an entire amazing world will be opened up to you. I'm no longer going to hand you the fish for your dinner - you're going to have to take some initiative and cast your own line instead.

“Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab. You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticise them, they cry”

Being both anonymous and retired, I think I am not at risk for making this observation. I had both male and female graduate students (in about equal numbers). Some women took the give and take of day to day science personally. And yes, I did occasionally witness crying.

madisonfella: "And he can't even ask politely and properly (what part do you need a link for: That there was a recall election against Walker?"

I guess your own comment wasn't sufficient as a "hint" for you.

So I'll spell it out for you.

Your plainly stated someone was fired from their job for signing a recall petition. Post the link for that.

I did google based on the information you provided, but only came up with stories related to WI newspapers that had chastised employees for signing recall petitions for Walker.

If that is the basis for your comment, it becomes obvious why you would not wish to post a link, since it would clearly demonstrate a non-parallel situation between your supposed outrage and the point of this thread.

So, to help you out a bit more, who was fired for signing a Walker recall petition and upon what basis?

As predicted, wittle baby Drago started wailing and crying when he wasn't handed his wittle bottle like he demanded. But at least he is using actual sentences now rather just grunting out one word responses.

And he is either lying about trying to google it or truly is an idiot because it really isn't that hard to do for those who possess at least average intelligence. It really is THIS easy: http://bfy.tw/Ky4

BTW: I used "man fired for signing walker recall petition" for my search and I saw the student appointment article on the second page of listings the search returned, but since having your governor-controlled appointment rescinded by the governor hardly qualifies as being fired from your job.

Observation: there is an inverse relationship between the number of words/insults/non-sequitors madisonfella utilizes and the objective measure of truth in madisonfellas assertions.

"Is his science wrong? If not, like Linus Pauling (one of only 2 people to win as a solo the Nobel Prize twice, Madame Curie being the other)"

Only partly true. Linus Pauling is the only person to have won two solo NP, the first in Chemistry (1954), the second being the Peace Prize (1962). Curie shared the 1903 Physics prize with her husband and also Becquerel. However, she is the only person to have won two prizes in two different sciences (Physics and Chemistry). No person has won two solo NP in the sciences.

So Drago claims the guy never-ever lost the job PLUS the Governor had the right to fire him anyways because it is a Governor's appointment. LOL!! Amazing bit of double-talk right there. Sounds like someone is desperately trying to cover all the bases, but my original statement still stands true: Fen cheered when a man lost a job in Wisconsin after a social justice warrior noticed he had signed the recall petition against Scott Walker. And my other statement also stands: Drago is too stupid to google things for himself and instead needs everything spoon-fed directly to him.

And interesting how he totally ignores the Facebook page where the Walker supporters are bragging about all the people they fired for signing the recall petitions. Can't wait to see the pretzel he twists himself into trying to explain that one away.

madisonfella: "So Drago claims the guy never-ever lost the job PLUS the Governor had the right to fire him anyways because it is a Governor's appointment."

No, that's not what I claimed. But after having been exposed you are going to have spin and crank up the word-count machine to try and obfuscate that.

The appointment was rescinded. As your very own link shows.

Rescinded.

Not fired.

Rescinded.

As your very own link shows.

I hope that helps you, though it's clear not much probably can.

LOL

Wait, it gets better. Much better! After having been exposed as being full of beans on the "man fired for signing Walker recall petition" hilariously false claim, madisonfella begins bleating about this:

madisonfella: "And interesting how he totally ignores the Facebook page where the Walker supporters are bragging about all the people they fired for signing the recall petitions.

LOL

Oh my! A Facebook page. Where supposed "Walker supporters" are making claims!!

Well, that certainly sounds "truthy"!!

I can't wait to next hear about the guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy who knows someone who got fired for signing the petition.

1) Professors, the longer they've been around and the more eminent they've become, seem to lose any power of evaluating the effect of their speech on an audience. After they're tenured their positions are very secure, and most of the time they are around students, over whom they have an enormous amount of power. So they expect most people to listen quietly and respectfully to whatever it is and they no longer notice cues that show they are boring people. They have a hard time not just going on and on and their jokes always get a polite laugh no matter how lame.

2) A new tenure line opens up only when someone dies or retires. A tenured position is as rare and valuable as a Moscow apartment in the 1930s--and like Moscow in the 1930s, a system exists that allows anonymous accusations to destroy successful people.

LOL!!! So the man didn't actually "lose" a job rather he simply had it "rescinded". And not just in that case, but rather it is impossible to be fired from any job that is "appointed" by a politician, because..well...because politicians are allowed to "rescind" appointments according to their whims and desires and thus that's not really the same as having "lost the job".

George Orwell would be very proud of the way Drago fully embraces DoubleSpeak.

PS - when I put "man fired for signing walker recall petition" the example being discussed shows up on the first page as the first example, not buried like Drago claim it was. Not saying he's lying about looking it up, maybe google gives him completely different results because he is special or something, but that is kind of weird.

For madisonfella (the very first paragraph of madisonfella's very own link): "A University of Wisconsin-Platteville engineering student anticipating a new seat on the UW System's Board of Regents was renounced at the eleventh hour by Gov. Scott Walker, who withdrew the young man's appointment after finding out he had signed a petition as an 18-year-old freshman calling for the governor's recall."

Why would this student be "anticipating a new seat" if he already held it?

How do you lose something you never actually had?

Clearly, these are questions to be pondered by our most celebrated philosophers.

Let me continue with the following admonition to Mr Inglett, the lad who had his governor-controlled appointment withdrawn as regards Mr Ingletts and madisonfellas supposed right to inhabit the WI Board of Regents: "you didn't build that"

Next up: garage explains how the WI Board of Regents has been gutted, bombed and destroyed by the failure of Walker to seat Mr Inglett on the Board.

etbass said...I got the feeling that this was the straw that broke the camel's back. This guy's modus operandi included such notions expressed in a variety of ways with little regard for how they might be received by his hearers. Spoken as a joke, they reflected pretty much how he felt and acted.

I am sure you got that feeling. Likely it reflects your beliefs, but it doesn't seem that this guy had trouble working with women. Indeed some very prominent women scientists have come to his defense. And his wife, who is no cupcake pushover. He may not always say the politically correct thing, but for actual work he valued competent woman scientists.

To me, the fact that so many women are in a full cry fit about this proves his point. A man said something that offended you. He didn't say it to you. He said it to an audience in Korea, thousands of miles away. Yet you are upset and offended. If I got upset and offended every time I read some nasty comment about men, I'd have no energy left for anything else.

You're offered a job and it is later rescinded. Thus, the job was lost to you.

Is that concept really too difficult for you to understand?

madisonfella explains how upset he/she is for not receiving the lottery winnings he/she never won

That's easy. If I have a Powerball ticket that hits on all the numbers but it is lost/destroyed before it can be officially claimed then of course I would be upset. Are you saying it wouldn't bother you at all since there was nothing lost other than a scrap of paper with numbers on it?

You really can't wrap your head around this at all, can you? At first I thought you were just just trolling as usual, but this truly does confuse and confound you...doesn't it?

btw, madisonfella, I wouldn't expect to receive a job with a Republican administration if it ends up you're working to get Democrats elected. That's how politics works. If you work for Democrats, expect to get job with Democrats, if you work for Republicans, expect to get jobs with Republicans. If you try and get a Republican fired, expect not to have any job with that Republican. If you work to get a Democrat fired, expect not to get to work for that Democrat.

Cry all you want about it, but I wouldn't want someone working for me who tried to get me fired either.

I might be fun to sit about and watch madisonfella spin and spin and spin (in a way not too dissimilar from that of a mouse caught in a trap), but I have an outstanding piece of grilled swordfish topped with a mango/avocado/red pepper salsa with my name on it.

Another beautiful evening in mountain west....at least here....and at least for the moment!

I'm wondering when madisonfella will be suing GE for "firing" him/her from a seat on their Board of Director?

GE never offered me a job on their Board of Directors - are you claiming Inglett was never offered a job as well? Also, I'm not saying he had a "right" to the job, nor did I say or even imply he should sue for having it taken away from him so stop building those straw men.

I offer to buy you lunch tomorrow, but later change my mind. Did you lose out on having your lunch paid for by me or not?

I'd like to take a moment to thank the Academy for their consideration, my peers for their guidance and support, my parents for their love and nurturing, my children for their enthusiastic embrace of my chosen profession and, most of all, my partner, my wife. (sorry Althouse, not my "husband").

madisonfella: "GE never offered me a job on their Board of Directors - are you claiming Inglett was never offered a job as well? Also, I'm not saying he had a "right" to the job, nor did I say or even imply he should sue for having it taken away from him so stop building those straw men"

madisonfella takes a very brief timeout from lobbing strawman after strawman into the dialogue to chide me for offering up a strawman!

When you're hand-picked for a job and told it is yours, but then they change their mind before you officially start. Is it really that difficult to understand?

Again, I'm not saying the Governor doesn't have the "right" to appoint whoever he wants to. But to claim that Inglett didn't lose the job is plain silly. It was his until they decided to take it away.

Another example: Undrafted rookie signs with the Packers but is cut before the season starts and no other team picks him up. I'd say he lost out on playing in the NFL. You would say he couldn't lose that because he never actually had it?

"Actually, it's probably true of anyone in any discussion. People tend to turn to insults when their worldview is challenged"

Again, in my experience thinking Conservatives will make cogent arguments and the vast majority of Liberals will fall into ad hominem hysterics when challenged. This has been so consistently true in 35 years of political discussions that I no longer take Liberals seriously as soon as I identify them as such. That's probably unfair to the handful of rational ones but life is short.

Again, in my experience thinking Conservatives will make cogent arguments and the vast majority of Liberals will fall into ad hominem hysterics when challenged

Says the guy whose name is intended as an ad hominem attack against another.

And seriously, you view Drago's responses in this thread as "cogent"? He refuses to answer any of the questions asked of him (would he be upset if he lost a winning lottery ticket before he could cash it in? Was I really offered a job with GE like Inglett was offered his?) and instead he makes only personal attacks and insults.

Couple friends were getting married, but he never shows up at the church and she is left at the altar. Later, I am talking to her about how horrible it is she lost out on enjoying married life when Drago stops eating is grilled fish long enough to say she never was actually married so therefore she didn't lose anything!

I won a sports car from a local radio station. It is delivered to my house, but is stolen before I get a chance to even drive it. I'd say I lost out on the pleasures of driving such a fine machine, but Drago would say how could I lose something I never had?

Was baking a cake yesterday when Drago snuck into my kitchen and turned the oven up to 500 degrees, resulting in a burnt lump of crap. When I got upset at him for taking away my dessert, he sneered that since I didn't actually eat any of it yet then nothing was lost to me.

not a single individual who signed a recall petition against Scott Walker has been fired for signing it.

You sound pretty sure about that. And perhaps you're right - the Walker supporters (on that Facebook page as well as the ones who were bragging on this blog about doing so) who are bragging about firing everyone could all just be blowhards who just say things that have no truth to them. Each and every one of them could be just be keyboard warriors who simply blow off steam online while actually doing nothing at all in the real world.

But I have a hard time believing that all of them are just talking bullshit. and it makes sense that people who hate/distrust/don't-like liberals to use such a list when hiring/firing. For example, just look at Cracker Emcee's opinion about liberals - if he runs a company why would he want anyone on his payroll who he can't take seriously? If one feels that liberals are idiots then why would they want an idiot representing their business?

That aside, we do know that at least one guy lost a job for signing the recall petition. No matter how much you try and deflect away from that, the facts are still the facts - it was his job until it was taken away from him. And again - of COURSE the Governor has the right to appoint who ever he wants, for any reason, and I never said nor implied otherwise. But to claim that a job rescinded is not a job lost is simply silly, and only shows the lengths conservatives will go to in order to defend their Dear Leader...even when Dear Leader didn't do anything wrong in the situation.

Wow, for an academic to speak freely is really dangerous, isn't it? What hypocrites and cowards Prof. Althouse and all her fellow prattlers about intellectual freedom are. What is say is, abolish tenure! It just protect incompetents, not academic freedom.

Funny. I thought the same thing with the whole "He never lost the job and besides the Governor can take away the job if he wants to" explanation. Not to mention the weird tangent about straight people and transsexuals getting married. You're grasping at ALL the straws.

madisonfella: " I thought the same thing with the whole "He never lost the job and besides the Governor can take away the job if he wants to" explanation."

Gee, it's a good thing I never wrote that!

LOL

Interesting quote marks you've included there. A casual reader might think I actually wrote that....in the same way that a casual reader might actually read what you wrote earlier and believe that someone was "fired" for signing a recall petition against Walker.

You say it is a fact they are all talking bullshit? It isn't just your opinion or your gut feelings, but rather you can prove that everything on that Facebook page is just a lie and not a single individual who signed a recall petition against Scott Walker has been fired for signing it ?

madisonfella: "You say it is a fact they are all talking bullshit? It isn't just your opinion or your gut feelings, but rather you can prove that everything on that Facebook page is just a lie and not a single individual who signed a recall petition against Scott Walker has been fired for signing it ?"

LOL

Logic fail.

Does your schtick actually work anywhere? This is rather pedestrian "stuff" you're peddling here.

A casual reader might think I actually wrote that....in the same way that a casual reader might actually read what you wrote earlier and believe that someone was "fired" for signing a recall petition against Walker.

For something so "pedestrian" it seems to have kept you busy for the past three hours. You even gulped down your dinner in order to hurry right back to the discussion. If this is such a dull and tiresome conversation for you, then why are you completely wrapped up and totally focused on it?

Yeah, stalinists, nazis, fascists. They are all cut from the same cloth. They all hate free speech. And they have this ugly desire to attack and violate innocent people. It's not enough for them to criticize what he says. They have to know where he lives, where he works. They want to hurt him, personally.

During Walker's reign of terror did he ever get anyone else fired or refuse to appoint one of his political enemies? If not, he should be taking some lessons from progressives like Stalin or women in academia.

I see that Hillary's thugs made some RNC staffers turn their shirts inside out to hide the "Stop Hillary" signage. I guess when you're in charge you rule.

"The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System consists of 18 members, 16 of whom are appointed by the Governor...Two UW System students are appointed to the Board for two-year terms; one of the two is a non-traditional student...The appointed Regents serve without pay."

Your time would be better spent finding a case of someone who was fired from their job due to signing a Walker recall petition.

On the other hand, since there is no one who has ever been fired due to signing a Walker recall petition, I guess we're going to talk about fish consumption rates for humans and "blue emu's" or something.

Scientists are beholden to the grants that fund their work, and many are activists in a way related to the work they are doing, which skews the results. Like Journalism it was corrupted long ago."Climate Change"is an example. The Ivory Tower of Academia, to which "law prof" belongs has been corrupted by the left wing money that funds it.

The realization is creeping in, isn't it? You make a joke about something with which you are "familiar" and someone else outside doesn't see it that way. It spirals out of control and you're fired. That's an eye-opener isn't it? Do we really want that to be SOP, even if you are in the wrong? Someone could take your comment here, publish it in just the right place, and your life turns to shit. I'd start holding your breath if I were you.

Exactly. I got what Ian was saying. But he needs to understand that the SJWs will be coming for him when they are done with the scientist. That's why I think he would be wise to attack this SJW bullshit pre-emptively.

"He erred in that he thought he was making a joke, when in fact he was speaking the truth."

I thought he was intending to speak truth all along, and truth based on his years of experience in the field:

1) when men and women are mixed together at work for long periods of time, they tend to develop romantic interests that get in the way of that work. Its hardly an offensive observation - how many movies have we seen where one says to the other "we can't have a relationship, it would get in the way of our mission".

2) women tend to take constructive criticism as a personal attack and react hysterically to it. Again, he is speaking from experience. And the feminists reacted disproportionately and made his point for him.

I'm with AceOfSpades on this one:

"I do care about my own mind, and the freedom to think not only things that are wrong, but increasingly, things which are obviously, demonstrably true To ask someone to indulge a polite fiction in a personal context is one thing; but to ask ...that one agree to a lie that someone else finds pleasing is quite another."

I remember when an old guy, let alone a 72-year-old, Nobel Prize-winning apparently tenured professor, could say pretty much whatever popped into his head and not end up losing his job and being booted out of polite society. Nowadays, not so much.

@Ian Watson - Very good post. What you describe is exactly what I have seen in my own career. I've never seen a greater power imbalance in any professional situation than the imbalance between well-funded STEM professors and their graduate students. I had the misfortune of being a graduate student in a very well-funded, prestigious, and highly pathological department, and that department saw several suicides by grad students and postdocs while I was there. In every case, abusive behavior by faculty (both male and female) was a contributing factor.

@Everyone else - Hunt's reputation for sexism goes back at least twenty-five years and was well known on both sides of the Atlantic. He may have been telling a joke, but he was not really joking.

When has ANYBODY been helped by apologizing? I mean, anybody the mob was upset with?

I remember when an old guy, let alone a 72-year-old, Nobel Prize-winning apparently tenured professor, could say pretty much whatever popped into his head and not end up losing his job and being booted out of polite society. Nowadays, not so much.

Remember, we NEED tenure to protect professors from the whims of the culture at large. It is vital or something.

I concur with @Ian Watson and Biff in terms of the power imbalance. It can become even more extreme for graduate students studying on a J-1 Visa. Then, their recourse for an untenable situation is essential nil.

The one caveat I have is that Mr. Hunt's words and reputation don't actually tell us how he treated his students, male or female. I am quite sure that many of the people who have elected to condemn him don't know either. Whether or not the condemnation of Twitter maps to Mr. Hunt's karma is a mystical question that I'm not prepared to answer.

We dispensed with that confusion though in short order and moved on to the "facts" of this latest heinous Walker act

Who said it was "heinous"? Not I - in fact, I repeatedly made it clear there was nothing wrong or nefarious with Walker taking the job away from Inglett. Do you even read what is written or are you intentionally being dishonest?

No need to actually answer that. Given the way it has been shown that you use multiple log-ins (and you even talk with yourself, weirdo) it is obvious there is nothing honest about you at all, no matter what name you are using.